Linguistic Gap Analysis — Zechariah (English → Spanish)

1. Purpose and Method

Zechariah presents a linguistic profile substantially different from the Romans baseline: it is apocalyptic-prophetic Hebrew narrative and oracle, saturated with the covenant name YHWH, dense night-vision imagery, and several short phrases that the New Testament later quotes verbatim of Christ. Where Romans required distinguishing doctrinal register within a shared vocabulary (justicia vs. justicia infundida, gracia vs. merit-cooperation), Zechariah additionally requires:

• Establishing an entirely new divine-name register (YHWH / “Jehová”) not needed at all in the Romans package, and fencing it against a live, named rival religious group that uses the identical Spanish word.
• Deciding, verse by verse, whether a Hebrew idiom, title, or grammatical form (e.g., a Niphal passive participle) is best served by an existing Spanish theological term, a new compound phrase, or a transliteration.
• Coordinating typological bridges (OT text → NT fulfillment) that the Romans package never had to build, since Romans is itself a NT text.

This document works doctrine-by-doctrine (§2), then cuts across doctrines to isolate missing vocabulary versus crowded/collision-prone vocabulary (§3), then adjudicates transliteration-vs-paraphrase case by case (§4), and closes with a ranked list of the highest-risk ambiguities in the book (§5).

---

2. Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

2.1 The Coming Messianic King

Element	Available Spanish terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
King (מֶלֶךְ)	rey	Lexically ordinary; can default to a merely historical/political monarch (any Spanish-language news article uses “rey” for secular kings)	Render “rey” but pair every occurrence with baseline messiah = “Mesías” (Critical) in teaching apparatus; never leave “rey” doctrinally unglossed
Messiah continuity	Mesías (baseline, REUSED)	None lexically; risk is that learners may not connect Zechariah’s “rey”/“el Vástago” figures to the single baseline “Mesías” without explicit signposting	Explicit cross-reference note at every occurrence of “rey,” “el Vástago,” and “sacerdote sobre su trono” tying them to “Mesías”
The Branch (צֶמַח)	el Vástago, el Renuevo, el brote/retoño	”el brote”/“el retoño” read as ordinary botanical/agricultural vocabulary in everyday Spanish (a plant sprouting), stripping the fixed-title force; “el Renuevo” is a valid ecumenical variant but risks inconsistency if mixed with “el Vástago” across documents	Standardize on “el Vástago,” capitalized, as a proper title; permit “el Renuevo” only as a footnoted ecumenical cross-reference, never as an interchangeable primary rendering
Priest-king union (כֹּהֵן עַל־כִּסְאוֹ)	sacerdote sobre su trono	Spanish has no single lexical item for this dual office; the priest/king separation that made this remarkable in Israel’s law is not an active cultural category for most Spanish-speaking readers	Retain the compound phrase (no single-word substitute exists); mandatory teaching bridge to Hebrews 7 (Melchizedekian priesthood)
Righteous King (צַדִּיק)	justo	Shares the baseline righteousness/justicia word-family exactly, which is doctrinally useful, but risks silent conflation with imputed_righteousness (a forensic status granted to believers) rather than the King’s own personal attribute	Render “justo”; mandatory note distinguishing the King’s own righteous character (ground) from imputed righteousness (grant)
Having salvation (נוֹשָׁע, Niphal)	salvador (active gloss), salvado (literal passive)	This is the single hardest lexical decision in the core passage: RV1960/RVA2015 tradition renders actively (“salvador”), matching the reading rhythm of “humilde, y montado sobre un asno… salvador”; but the Hebrew grammar is passive, meaning the King has himself been saved/vindicated by God before he saves others — a nuance “salvador” alone erases	Primary rendering “salvador” (tradition-consistent, reads naturally in the verse); MANDATORY translator note preserving the passive sense (“salvado/vindicado por Dios”) in every occurrence, teaching both senses as complementary, not competing
Universal dominion (מֶמְשַׁלְתּוֹ)	su señorío, su dominio	”su dominio” is doctrinally neutral and safer but forfeits a deliberate, valuable lexical echo	Prefer “su señorío” to create an intentional resonance with baseline lord = “Señor” (Lordship of Christ); must be taught explicitly as a designed typological echo, confirmed by theologian review, not left for the learner to notice unaided
Peace to the nations	hablará paz a las naciones	”naciones” vs. “gentiles” register collision (see §3.2)	Use “naciones” consistently for OT goyim; never substitute “gentiles”

2.2 Restoration of Jerusalem and the Temple

Element	Available Spanish terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
Divine indwelling (שָׁכַנְתִּי בְתוֹכֵךְ)	habitaré en medio de ti	Reads easily as a general promise of blessing/presence rather than the specific forerunner of incarnational “dwelling” theology (John 1:14)	Retain literal rendering; mandatory forward-bridge note to baseline incarnation
Covenant formula (וְהָיִיתִי לָהֶם לֵאלֹהִים…)	yo seré su Dios, y ellos serán mi pueblo	No lexical weakness; risk is treating it as a self-contained OT promise rather than a canon-spanning formula (2 Corinthians 6:16; Revelation 21:3)	Retain exact phrase; flag for cross-curriculum consistency at the whole-canon level
Holy to the LORD, universalized holiness	Santidad a Jehová	Depends on the “Jehová” decision (§3.1); risk of being read as a decorative inscription rather than the universalizing extension of holiness once confined to priestly garments	Combine established holy = “santo” with “Jehová”; teaching note on the Exodus 28:36 background
”Mercader” for כְנַעֲנִי (14:21)	mercader, cananeo	”cananeo” unqualified reads as an unglossed ethnic label; the Hebrew’s intended double sense (trader/Canaanite) is lost either way in a single Spanish word	Render “mercader” primary, mandatory footnote explaining the Hebrew wordplay; never render bare “cananeo” without the gloss
Restoration as salvation (הוֹשַׁעְתִּי)	salvación / salvaré	Reuses baseline salvation exactly, which is a strength, but folk-Catholic piety frames deliverance as a lifelong negotiated outcome (sacraments, penance, saintly intercession) rather than a settled divine act	Reuse baseline term exactly; explicit contrast note distinguishing Zechariah’s decisive “I will save” from a negotiated-merit framework
Measuring line, city of truth, living waters, apple of his eye, Mount of Olives split	cordel de medir; Ciudad de la Verdad; aguas vivas; niña de su ojo; el monte de los Olivos se partirá	Mostly low lexical risk; “aguas vivas” and the Mount of Olives image risk being received as decorative apocalyptic imagery, disconnected from Revelation 22:1/John 7:38 and Acts 1:11-12 respectively	Retain established renderings; attach forward-bridge notes rather than altering the lexical choice

2.3 Visions of God’s Sovereign Plan for His People

Element	Available Spanish terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
The covenant name (יְהוָה)	Jehová, el Eterno, SEÑOR (small caps)	See §3.1 in full — the single most consequential decision in the whole package	”Jehová” per RV1960/RVA2015 register, with mandatory teaching note fencing against Jehovah’s Witness (Testigos de Jehová) associations
LORD of hosts (יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת)	Jehová de los ejércitos, Jehová Sebaot, el Señor Todopoderoso	Three competing traditions (Reina-Valera transliteration-compound, straight transliteration, NVI dynamic-equivalence); inconsistent use across 50+ occurrences would fragment the book’s dominant self-designation	Standardize on “Jehová de los ejércitos” at every occurrence; forbid mixing with the other two variants within any single document
Providence — four winds/chariots	providencia; no con ejército, ni con fuerza, sino con mi Espíritu	Vivid visionary imagery (dispatched chariots, winds) risks an impersonal “forces of nature” reading rather than personal divine governance	Risk elevated from baseline Medium to High for this curriculum; mandatory personal-agency teaching note at 4:6 and 6:1-8
Idols/terafim, the curse, wickedness personified	ídolos; la maldición; la Maldad	”la maldición” risks a brujería/hex reading in Afro-Caribbean spiritist contexts; “ídolos” risks under-connecting to modern folk-religious divination practice	Retain literal renderings; mandatory teaching notes distinguishing covenant-lawcourt sanction from occult curse-casting, and distinguishing terafim-consultation from consultation of saints/spirits in popular piety
Day of the LORD / universal kingship (14:9)	el día de Jehová; Jehová será rey sobre toda la tierra	Depends entirely on the “Jehová” decision; also requires reconciling with NT “el día del Señor” at the whole-canon level	Render with “Jehová” per convention; flag both for cross-curriculum whole-canon consistency review, not resolved at this Phase 1 stage

2.4 The Piercing of the One They Have Pierced (Zechariah 12:10)

Element	Available Spanish terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
”They will look on me, whom they have pierced”	mirarán a mí, a quien traspasaron; a quien atravesaron; a quien hirieron (rejected)	This is the single highest-doctrinal-weight phrase in the entire book. Three failure modes exist simultaneously: (1) softening the verb toward “herir” (wound) loses the piercing/thrusting force fulfilled literally at the spear-thrust of John 19:34,37; (2) shifting from first-person “a mí” to third-person “a él” severs YHWH’s self-identification with the pierced one, which is the load-bearing deity-of-Christ argument; (3) treating “Jehová” (speaker) and the pierced “me” as merely analogous rather than identical persons flattens the verse’s force	Mandatory: retain first-person voice; retain the violent/physical verb (“traspasaron” primary, “atravesaron” acceptable variant, “hirieron” forbidden); mandatory human theologian review on every single occurrence, with explicit note that the speaker (Jehová) and the pierced one are grammatically and theologically the same referent
Strike the shepherd (13:7)	Hiere al pastor	Direct dominical quotation (Jesus quotes this of himself, Matthew 26:31); any variation across documents would obscure the deliberate self-application	Render identically everywhere; no variant permitted
Fountain opened for sin (13:1)	una fuente abierta para el pecado y la impureza	Reuses baseline sin exactly (a strength); risk is treating 13:1 as an unrelated image rather than the direct sequel to 12:10	Mandatory cause-and-effect teaching note linking 13:1 to 12:10 as a single atonement sequence
Spirit of grace and pleas for mercy (12:10)	espíritu de gracia y de oración	Reuses baseline grace lexeme, but the sense here (a poured-out disposition producing repentance) is not identical to the forensic Romans 3-5 sense	Mandatory distinguishing note: related but non-identical senses of “gracia”
Mourning like Hadad-Rimmon (12:11)	llanto como el llanto de Hadad-rimón	Requires a historical-cultural footnote (a known funeral lament), not a translation decision	Retain proper name with footnote

2.5 God’s Zeal for Zion

Element	Available Spanish terms	Weaknesses	Recommended strategy
I am jealous/zealous (קִנֵּאתִי)	tengo celos, celo; estoy enojado (rejected); estoy obsesionado (rejected)	“celos/celo” in everyday Spanish skews heavily toward romantic jealousy, suspicion, or possessiveness between people — the dominant contemporary connotation, especially in casual and telenovela-influenced register; “enojado” loses the covenantal-love dimension entirely; “obsesionado” imports an unrelated psychological register	Retain “celo/celos” as the closest lexical match to the Hebrew’s covenant-jealousy semantic field (same root family as Exodus 20:5’s “Dios celoso”), but this is the doctrine with the single widest gap between everyday connotation and intended theological meaning in the whole curriculum; mandatory explicit teaching note at every occurrence distinguishing protective covenant love from petty interpersonal jealousy
Apple of his eye (2:8)	niña de su ojo	Established Bible idiom; risk is low but “algo muy precioso” flattens the protective-vulnerability nuance (the eye is a body part uniquely exposed)	Retain the idiom “niña de su ojo”; do not substitute a non-idiomatic paraphrase
Encamp as guard (9:8)	acamparé alrededor de mi casa como guarda	Personal, protective divine presence; risk of being read as generic architectural protection rather than personal divine defense tied to Zeal-for-Zion	Retain literal rendering with native-speaker review flag preserving the personal register

---

3. Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods

3.1 The Central Crowded-Neighborhood Problem: “Jehová”

This is the highest-stakes lexical decision introduced by this curriculum and has no counterpart in the Romans baseline, which never had to formalize a covenant-name register because the New Testament epistles do not use the tetragrammaton.

• The neighborhood is crowded, not empty. Spanish already has three live options for YHWH (Jehová / el Eterno / SEÑOR in small caps), and “Jehová” specifically is the most visible and recognizable Spanish word for the covenant name because of Jehovah’s Witnesses (Testigos de Jehová), a large, actively evangelizing religious movement across the Spanish-speaking world that uses this exact word to argue against the full deity of Christ and the Trinity.
• The doctrinal irony is severe: Zechariah is one of the Old Testament books the New Testament most directly uses to prove the deity of Christ (12:10; 14:9), yet the very word this Language Package must use for YHWH throughout the book is the signature term of a movement that denies that doctrine.
• Fencing strategy: every occurrence of “Jehová” in Zechariah-curriculum materials requires:
  1. Visual/lexical distinction from baseline lord = “Señor” (used for κύριος/Jesus) maintained within the Old Testament text itself.
  2. An explicit teaching note, especially at 12:10 and 14:9, stating that the New Testament identifies Jesus with this very “Jehová” — turning the crowded neighborhood into a teaching opportunity rather than leaving it as an unaddressed collision risk.
  3. A standing glossary caution (recommended for the translation_memory.json entry) flagging the Jehovah’s Witness association explicitly, so Phase 2 human reviewers are not caught unaware.
• Alternative rejected: switching to “el Eterno” or unglossed “SEÑOR” (small caps) to avoid the collision was considered and rejected, because it would break register consistency with the RV1960/RVA2015 tradition this Language Package has already committed to for Romans, and because avoidance does not resolve the underlying theological confusion — only explicit teaching does.

3.2 Crowded Neighborhood: “naciones” vs. “gentiles”

Spanish possesses two words serving what English flattens into one (“nations/Gentiles”). The baseline already reserves “gentiles” for the NT’s Jew/Gentile technical contrast. Zechariah’s Hebrew goyim occurs in an OT covenant-historical register (nations as political/ethnic entities receiving the King’s peace, 9:10; streaming to Jerusalem, 14:16) that Reina-Valera tradition renders “naciones.” This curriculum must not let “gentiles” leak backward into the Old Testament text, or it will blur the very register distinction the baseline relies on for Romans’ Jew/Gentile argument. This is a fencing issue, not a missing-vocabulary issue: both words already exist; the risk is cross-contamination between two adjacent uses in a single translation memory.

3.3 Crowded Neighborhood: “santos” / “intercesión” (inherited from baseline, intensified here)

The baseline already flags “santos” (Critical) and “intercesión” (Critical) as Catholic-popular-piety collision risks. Zechariah intensifies both:

• 12:10’s “espíritu de… oración/súplica” (תַחֲנוּנִים) is the people’s own Spirit-produced repentant supplication — grammatically and theologically distinct from the Spirit’s/Christ’s intercession for believers in Romans 8:26-27, 34, yet lexically adjacent enough in English (“supplication”/“intercession”) that a careless Phase 2 worker could render it with the same Spanish phrase the baseline reserves for Christ’s mediatorial intercession. Fencing decision: render Zechariah 12:10’s term as “oración/súplica,” never as “intercesión,” to keep the two senses lexically distinct even though they are conceptually related.
• The corporate “casa de David” mourning over the pierced one (12:10-14) is adjacent to, but not identical with, the baseline’s “santos” concern; no direct collision, but flagged for consistency review since both doctrines touch corporate identity in Christ.

3.4 Crowded Neighborhood: “celo/celos” (God’s Zeal for Zion)

Unlike “Jehová,” where the problem is an external rival religious group, “celo/celos” is a purely register collision internal to ordinary Spanish: the dominant everyday sense is romantic/interpersonal jealousy (a term of suspicion between spouses or partners), which is emotionally negative in ordinary usage. The covenantal sense (protective, loyal, jealous love, cf. Éxodo 20:5 “Dios celoso”) is theologically positive but linguistically underserved — Spanish has no separate, unambiguous word for “righteous divine zeal” distinct from “petty human jealousy.” This is a genuine missing-vocabulary gap, not merely a crowded neighborhood, since no clean alternative word exists that avoids the collision entirely (“fervor,” “pasión,” “devoción” were considered and rejected as too weak or wrong-register). The recommended strategy is therefore not lexical substitution but mandatory explanatory scaffolding at every occurrence.

3.5 Missing Vocabulary: Priest-King Union and Branch-as-Title

Two genuine gaps, where Spanish has no ready single-word equivalent at all:

• כֹּהֵן עַל־כִּסְאוֹ (“a priest on his throne”): Spanish has no compact idiom for the union of priestly and royal office; “sacerdote sobre su trono” is a necessary compound phrase, not a translation shortcut. The concept itself (offices Israel’s law kept structurally separate) is not an active cultural category for most Spanish-speaking learners, so the gap is conceptual as much as lexical.
• צֶמַח as a fixed Messianic title (“the Branch”): ordinary Spanish botanical vocabulary (“brote,” “retoño”) is available but semantically too weak to carry titular, capitalized force; “el Vástago” (already somewhat elevated/literary in register) is the best available option precisely because it is less common in everyday speech, and therefore reads more naturally as a proper title rather than a descriptive metaphor.

3.6 Missing Vocabulary: The Passive/Active Voice Gap in נוֹשָׁע (9:9)

This is a genuine grammatical gap between Hebrew and Spanish (and English): Hebrew’s Niphal passive participle has no single-word Spanish equivalent that preserves both (a) the tradition-established active gloss “who brings salvation” and (b) the literal passive sense “one who has been saved/vindicated.” Spanish forces a binary choice between “salvador” (active, tradition-consistent, but one-sided) and “salvado” (literal, passive, but breaks with RV1960/RVA2015 rendering tradition and reads awkwardly in the verse’s flow). No compound phrase adequately holds both senses in natural liturgical Spanish. This is resolved not by translation but by mandatory bilingual translator notation (§2.1 above), the clearest example in this book of a gap that cannot be closed by word choice alone and must be closed by pedagogical apparatus.

---

4. Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Term/Phrase	Decision	Rationale
יְהוָה (YHWH)	Transliteration-tradition hybrid — “Jehová” (established RV1960/RVA2015 transliterated form)	Matches this Language Package’s stated Reina-Valera register; paraphrase options (“el Eterno,” “SEÑOR” small caps) would break consistency with the baseline and lose the concrete proper-name force the doctrine argument (12:10, 14:9) depends on
יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת	Hybrid compound — “Jehová de los ejércitos” (transliteration + translated epithet), not “Jehová Sebaot” (full transliteration)	RV1960/RVA2015 convention; full transliteration (“Sebaot”) is less accessible to the target reading-level (secondary-school proficiency per baseline tone requirements)
אַבָּא (Abba) — cross-reference only	Transliteration retained, per baseline	No new decision needed; Zechariah does not use this term directly, but Romans 8:15 cross-references require consistency
צֶמַח (the Branch)	Paraphrase-as-title — “el Vástago,” not a transliterated Hebrew form	No established Spanish transliteration tradition exists for this term (unlike “Mesías” or “Jehová”); a translated title capitalized as a proper name is the correct strategy
מָשִׁיחַ (Mashiach)	REUSED transliteration-derived form — “Mesías” (baseline)	Already fully naturalized in Spanish; no new decision required
שְׁלֹשִׁים כָּסֶף (thirty pieces of silver)	Paraphrase, numeral fixed — “treinta piezas de plata”	A concrete quantity/object phrase, not a proper name; transliteration is inapplicable. Numeral and unit must be locked across every document (variant “treinta monedas de plata” permitted only if used with total internal consistency, never mixed)
הֲדַד־רִמּוֹן (Hadad-Rimmon)	Transliteration — “Hadad-rimón”	Proper place/deity name with no meaningful Spanish equivalent; standard transliteration with a footnote is the only viable strategy
כְנַעֲנִי (Canaanite/trader, 14:21)	Paraphrase with mandatory footnote, not transliteration	Rendering as unqualified “cananeo” (transliterated ethnonym) would misfire as an unglossed ethnic label; “mercader” (paraphrase capturing the functional sense) plus a footnote explaining the Hebrew double meaning is the safer strategy
שָׁלוֹם (shalom)	REUSED translation, not transliteration — “paz” (baseline)	Already fully naturalized; no transliteration tradition needed or wanted
חֶסֶד וְרַחֲמִים (chesed verachamim)	Paraphrase — “misericordia y compasión”	No single Spanish word captures chesed’s covenant-loyalty nuance; a two-word paraphrase, flagged for native-speaker review, is the accepted compromise rather than attempting a novel single-word coinage
תְּרָפִים (terafim)	Paraphrase, generalized — “ídolos”	No accessible transliteration tradition exists for this specific term in Spanish Bible usage; a generalized paraphrase with a teaching note distinguishing it from modern folk-divination is preferred over a technical transliteration few readers would recognize
קִנֵּאתִי (zeal/jealousy)	Paraphrase, not transliteration — “tengo celos / celo”	Not a proper name or fixed technical term; paraphrase is the only option, but see §3.4 for the resulting scaffolding requirement
חַג הַסֻּכּוֹת (Feast of Booths)	Paraphrase using established festival name — “la fiesta de los Tabernáculos”	Standard, already-naturalized Spanish Bible festival name; transliteration is unnecessary and would be unrecognizable
דָּוִיד, יִשְׂרָאֵל (David, Israel)	REUSED established transliterated proper names — baseline	No new decision required

---

5. Ranked List of This Book’s Highest-Risk Ambiguities

Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × likelihood of mistranslation or misreading × breadth of downstream impact across the curriculum’s five doctrines).

1. Zechariah 12:10, “mirarán a mí, a quien traspasaron.” The single highest-risk phrase in the entire book. Three independent failure modes (verb-softening, person-shift, speaker/referent identity blur) can each independently sever the deity-of-Christ argument. Mandatory theologian review on every occurrence; see 08_core_glossary.md §Section 2, entry 30, and bible_term_registry.json pierced_one.

2. “Jehová” as the rendering of YHWH throughout. Unique to this curriculum (no Romans-baseline precedent); the single word chosen to carry the book’s dominant divine self-designation is also the signature term of a rival Spanish-language religious movement (Testigos de Jehová) that denies the very doctrine (deity of Christ) this book is used to prove. Every one of the ~50+ occurrences of “Jehová” and “Jehová de los ejércitos” carries this collision risk simultaneously.

3. Zechariah 9:9, נוֹשָׁע (“salvador” vs. the underlying passive “salvado”). The highest-nuance single grammatical decision in the core passage (9:9-10) itself. Because this is the curriculum’s designated core passage, an unflagged error here propagates through every lesson built on it.

4. “Celo/celos” for God’s Zeal for Zion. The widest gap between everyday Spanish connotation (romantic jealousy, generally negative) and required theological meaning (protective covenant love, positive) of any term in the doctrine list; unlike the “Jehová” problem (an external rival tradition), this is an internal register collision built into ordinary Spanish usage itself, making it easy to under-flag.

5. “Su señorío” (9:10) as a deliberate echo of baseline “Señor.” High doctrinal upside if taught explicitly (bridges to Romans 10:9’s Lordship confession) but high risk of being read as either an accidental stylistic collision (if unexplained) or an overreach (if the typological connection is asserted without adequate exegetical support) if the theologian review is skipped.

6. 13:7, “Hiere al pastor,” and 11:12-13, “treinta piezas de plata” / “el alfarero.” Directly, verifiably quoted or echoed in the Gospels (Matthew 26:31; 26:15; 27:9-10). The risk here is not ambiguity of meaning but inconsistency across documents — any drift in exact wording or numeral across Phase 2 workers would sever the learner’s ability to recognize the fulfillment citation.

7. Zechariah 14:9, “Jehová será rey sobre toda la tierra,” in relation to 9:9-10. Risk that the book’s climactic universal-kingship statement is taught as a separate divine-sovereignty theme rather than the same reign inaugurated humbly by the King on the donkey — collapsing two doctrines (Coming Messianic King and Sovereign Plan) into disconnected units rather than a single narrative arc.

8. “Espíritu de gracia y de oración” (12:10) vs. baseline “gracia.” Risk of learners collapsing Zechariah’s outpoured-disposition sense of grace into the forensic Romans 3-5 justification sense, producing either a diluted doctrine of grace or an over-systematized flattening of two related-but- distinct biblical uses of the same Spanish word.

9. “Naciones” vs. “gentiles” register discipline. Lower doctrinal stakes per single occurrence than items 1-8, but high cumulative risk across the whole book (goyim appears repeatedly in chs. 2, 8, 9, 14) since consistent register discipline is what allows the OT/NT distinction to function at all when this curriculum is later read alongside the Romans materials.

10. “Mercader” for כְנַעֲנִי (14:21) without the mandatory footnote. Lower frequency (single occurrence) but a real risk of an unglossed literal rendering (“cananeo”) landing as an unqualified ethnic label, which would be both exegetically wrong and needlessly offensive if the footnote is dropped in abbreviated Phase 2 outputs (e.g., summary study notes that compress footnoted material).

---

6. Summary Recommendations for Phase 2 Enforcement

1. Add “Jehová” and “Jehová de los ejércitos” to translation_memory.json as new top-level Critical entries distinct from baseline lord, carrying an explicit Jehovah’s Witness fencing note (per §3.1).
2. Add a standing forbidden-substitution rule: never render Zechariah 12:10 in third person or with a softened verb; never render 9:9’s נוֹשָׁע without the mandatory bilingual translator note; never mix “treinta piezas de plata”/“treinta monedas de plata” within one document. 3. Elevate “providencia” and “hablará paz a las naciones” risk tiers as already reflected in the core glossary (Medium→High), and carry that elevation into doctrine_risk_registry.json extensions.
3. Flag “celo/celos” for mandatory explanatory scaffolding at every occurrence, not merely at first occurrence, given how easily the everyday negative connotation can silently override the covenantal sense in a reader’s mind on repeated encounters.
4. Maintain strict “naciones” (OT) vs. “gentiles” (NT) register separation across all Zechariah materials to protect the baseline’s own Jew/Gentile doctrinal architecture from Romans.

This document should be loaded alongside the Zechariah core glossary (08) and the Romans-baseline translation_memory.json before Phase 1 Step 9 (doctrine risk registry extension) and before any Phase 2 segment translation begins.